Skip to main content

About your Search

20110701
20110701
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
taliban stronghold particularly in the south. another major change in the last year is the surge in afghan security forces. there are now 100,000 more afghan security forces than 18 months ago when president obama announced the surge and another 70,000 afghan soldiers and police will be trained and equipped by the end of next summer when all 33,000 u.s. search trips will have withdrawn. in the testimony to congress last week, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff admiral mollen characterized the president's decision as, quote, more aggressive and incurring more risk than mcraven had initially recommended. however, admiral mullen felt, could come only the president and the end can really determine the acceptable level of risk we must take because as he put it, quote, the truth is we would have run other kind of risks by keeping more forces in afghanistan longer. and among the other risks for the risks of perpetuating the greater afghan dependent on the forces and inhibiting the growth and keep the devotee and confidence on the part of the afghan forces. the committee will be interested
of united states meetings with taliban officials and also what pakistan can bring to the table? pakistan has talked frequently about needing to have a seat at the table. what do you bring to the table? the americans have said you need to either sever your relationship for example with the haqqani network or bring them into this process. what can pakistan do in order to make this process work better? >> first of all, we support a reconciliation in afghanistan because we understand that wars essentially always and through some kind of reconciliation and talks anyway. so, the reconciliation process in afghanistan has to be led at the afghans. it is their country, and to bring to an and the eternal conflict in afghanistan that started after the departure of the soviets way back in 89. the soviets -- continued to hold on and after 1992 there was the famous war that brought the taliban to power. so we did not want in any way to intervene in the internal afghan process. it has to be an afghan-led process. we are very closely in contact with the afghan leadership. president karzai has visited pakist
's assessment is? the reconciliation in general, reports said the united states became taliban officials? and pakistan has talked frequently about needing a seat at the table. the americans have said you need to sever your relationship with the haqqani network lowered bring them into this process. what can pakistan do to make it work better? >> we support the reconciliation because we have understand the that wars always end through the reconciliation and talks anyway. the reconciliation process has to be led by the afghans. it is their country and with the internal conflict, and continued to hold the line and then there was the famous civil war. so we do not want to intervene in past abc's lead process and president karzai and our the jurors continually engaged with the leadership and koppel and afghanistan and the united states form the core group but they would slow the a engage others. it is one minute for me to play professor instead of ambassador. when the soviets left, regional powers adopt did different factions of those groups primarily to fight the soviet union. they created a
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3